Your Best Intake Coordinator Is Probably Working on Your Worst Cases
The signed-case probability score exists because most personal injury intake teams operate on a rule that sounds efficient but destroys value: first in, first called.
The case opportunity that arrived at 9:01 AM gets the first call. The one that arrived at 9:07 AM waits. It does not matter whether the 9:01 case has no documented injury, unclear liability, and a statute problem. It arrived first. Because it arrived first, it gets the firm's best resource — the intake coordinator's first call of the morning, when her energy is highest and the claimant's urgency is most acute.
This is not an intake performance problem. It is a triage architecture problem.
And it costs the average $5M+ PI firm far more in foregone signed cases than any inefficiency in how the intake team handles the calls it does make. Because while the coordinator is working through the 9:01 case — documenting that it has no documentable injury, that liability is unclear, that the statute expired six months ago — the 9:07 case, with full injury documentation, clear liability, and 22 months of statute remaining, sits in a queue. Waiting.
Speed is irrelevant if you are fast in the wrong direction.
The signed-case probability score is the structural fix for this problem. Before the intake team makes its first call of the day, the SCPS tells them which opportunity has the highest probability of producing a signed retainer. As a result, the intake coordinator's best energy goes to the firm's best cases — not to whichever cases happened to arrive first.
The signed-case probability score treats each case as a probability, not a position in a queue
At the average PI intake conversion rate of 7 percent across all unfiltered leads, a firm processing 50 inquiries per day has approximately 46.5 of those calls producing nothing-no signed case, no revenue, no outcome.
However, the intake coordinator's time, skill, and first-call energy are distributed equally across the 46.5 zero-outcome calls and the 3.5 that will sign.
SCPS-informed triage concentrates the intake team's first response on the 3.5 cases most likely to sign. That reallocation, applied consistently, produces 20 to 35 percent improvement in signed-case rate from the same lead volume — without adding a single person to the intake team.
Source: legal marketing benchmarks 2024; CasePort qualification waterfall model.
What the Signed-Case Probability Score Measures
The signed-case probability score is not a rating of the claimant. It is not a judgment of their credibility or the merit of their situation. Rather, it is a probability prediction — a single percentage that answers one specific question: given what we know about this case opportunity right now, how likely is it that this firm will sign a retainer?
Five factors compose the score. Because each factor is weighted and scored algorithmically, the SCPS produces a consistent, comparable output across every case opportunity removing the subjectivity that makes manual intake triage unreliable at scale.
Factor 1 — Injury documentation quality. Does the opportunity include documented evidence of physical injury? Medical records, emergency room visits, physician notes, diagnostic imaging, or a detailed injury statement with corroborating evidence all contribute positively. Therefore, the absence of any injury documentation is the single most predictive negative signal in the model. A personal injury case without a documentable injury is not a case. The SCPS weights this factor most heavily because no downstream factor — however strong — can overcome it.
Factor 2 — Liability clarity. Is there a clearly identified liable party? A rear-end collision with a police report naming the at-fault driver scores higher than a multi-vehicle incident with disputed fault. Slip-and-fall cases with dated incident reports and witness statements score higher than unwitnessed falls with no documentation. Because liability uncertainty is the second most predictive negative signal, it carries substantial weight in the scoring model.
Factor 3 — Statute of limitations status. How much time remains in the filing window? A case with two years remaining is not the same as a case with 60 days remaining, even if all other factors are identical. In addition, statute proximity creates urgency — the claimant knows time is running out, and that awareness increases their motivation to engage quickly. Cases within 30 days of the statute window require immediate priority regardless of other scoring factors.
Factor 4 — Case type match with the firm's historical signing profile. Does this case type align with what this specific firm actually signs and successfully litigates? However strong the other factors, a firm that signs 90 percent auto accident cases will convert auto accident opportunities at a materially higher rate than slip-and-fall cases. The signed-case probability score accounts for this firm-specific pattern, not a generic market average.
Factor 5 — Firm response capacity at the moment of delivery. Is the firm's intake team available to respond within the signed-case probability window? As a result of response-time decay, a 74 percent SCPS case delivered at 11 PM to a firm with no after-hours coverage has a different real-world probability than the same case delivered at 2 PM on a Tuesday. Response capacity is the most operational factor and the most controllable.
The signed-case probability score is expressed as a single percentage. A score of 74 percent means the opportunity has a 74 percent predicted probability of resulting in a signed retainer, given all five factors.
A score of 23 percent means the same for a significantly lower-probability opportunity. The percentage is the only number the intake team needs to prioritize their response.
How the signed-case probability score identifies the statute risks most intake teams miss
In assessments of PI intake calls, attorneys correctly identified statute-proximity issues — cases within 60 days of the statute in only 34 percent of instances where this issue was present.
The reason: claimants rarely volunteer statute information unprompted, and most intake scripts do not ask directly. A claimant who says "I was hurt about two years ago" may be telling the intake coordinator they have 30 days left to file but that information does not surface unless the script specifically asks about incident date.
The signed-case probability score treats statute status as a scored, flagged factor that triggers automatic urgency signals removing the risk that proximity is missed in a manual intake conversation.
Source: CasePort intake quality research synthesis; ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.3 — Diligence.
The Signed-Case Probability Score Is the Credit Score for Case Opportunities
Banks do not lend to everyone who applies. Before allocating capital, they score the probability of repayment across multiple factors — income, debt history, collateral, employment stability.
The credit score does not approve or deny the application. It tells the loan officer which applications deserve immediate attention, which require further review, and which should be declined before resources are committed.
The signed-case probability score applies the same logic to personal injury case opportunities.
Before a PI firm allocates its most finite resource — an intake coordinator's first call — the SCPS scores the probability of return across five factors. A high score does not guarantee a signed case.
However, it tells the intake coordinator which opportunities deserve immediate attention, which require senior review, and which should be triaged before phone capacity is committed.
The firms that have adopted SCPS-informed intake describe a shift that is more fundamental than improved conversion rates. Because every opportunity arrives with a probability attached, intake stops being a gut-feel activity and becomes a portfolio management activity. The intake coordinator is no longer asking "should I call this person?" She is asking "what is the expected return on this call, and how does it rank against the other opportunities in my queue?"
That is a different cognitive frame. And it produces different outcomes.
The Two-Variable Framework: Quality and Speed
The signed-case probability score answers one question. Response time answers another. Both must be optimized simultaneously and most firms optimize neither systematically.
Think of it as a two-axis decision. One axis is case quality — the SCPS. The other is response speed — the Lead Decay Model. Each quadrant produces a different outcome.
High SCPS, fast response: Maximum signed-case value. The case is real, the liability is clear, and the firm reached the claimant inside the probability window. This is the only outcome that justifies the full acquisition spend.
High SCPS, slow response: Value destroyed by latency. The case was real. The firm did not reach the claimant in time. A competitor signed it. This is the most painful quadrant — avoidable, measurable, and common.
Low SCPS, fast response: Speed wasted on the wrong case. The intake coordinator called immediately. However, the case had no documented injury, unclear liability, or a statute problem. The call produced nothing except the cost of the coordinator's time and the displacement of a higher-SCPS case that waited.
Low SCPS, slow response: No value was possible. As a result, this is actually the least damaging quadrant from a resource standpoint — the wrong case was slow, but at least it did not displace the right cases.
The firms with the highest signed-case rates are not the fastest firms. They are the firms that are fastest on the right cases. SCPS-informed triage creates that distinction. Without a scoring mechanism, the intake coordinator cannot make that distinction so the distribution of her best response energy is random rather than probability-optimized.
How SCPS-informed triage changes the signed-case probability of every case in the queue
The SCPS sets the ceiling of what a case opportunity can become. Response time determines how close to that ceiling the firm performs. A 74 percent SCPS case is a high-quality opportunity. Contacted within 5 minutes, it converts at approximately three times the rate of the same case contacted at 30 minutes because the Lead Decay Curve compresses the achievable probability from 74 percent toward 15 percent as time passes.
Therefore, the SCPS and the Lead Decay Model interact in a specific way: quality sets the potential, timing determines the capture. Optimizing one without the other leaves significant signed-case value on the table.
Source: CasePort Lead Decay Model 2026; SCPS interaction analysis, caseport.io/data-standards.
The SCPS as a Financial Instrument
Here is where the signed-case probability score becomes more than a triage tool.
Because the SCPS expresses probability as a percentage, it converts each case opportunity into a calculable expected financial value. This transforms intake from "should we call this person?" into "what is this opportunity worth to our firm right now?"
The expected case value formula:
Expected case value = average attorney fee x signed-case probability score
Using CasePort benchmark figures from CCC Intelligent Solutions 2024 auto claims data: Average attorney fee on an auto bodily injury case: $9,033 (33% of $27,373 average BI settlement, per ABA standard contingency fee)
A case opportunity with a signed-case probability score of 74%: $9,033 x 74% = $6,685 expected case value
A case opportunity with a signed-case probability score of 23%: $9,033 x 23% = $2,078 expected case value
The same delivery cost produces dramatically different expected returns depending on case quality. A firm paying $1,500 per pre-qualified case opportunity is paying $1,500 for an expected value of $6,685 on a high-SCPS case — a 4.5x return on acquisition spend.
However, the same firm spending $300 on a shared lead with a 2.2 percent unfiltered conversion rate is paying $300 for an expected value of approximately $200 — a negative acquisition ROI before a single call is made.
The signed-case probability score is not just a prioritization tool. It is the missing link between acquisition cost and case economics. Because every opportunity arrives with an expected value attached, the intake team is no longer doing intake in isolation. They are managing a portfolio of probability-weighted assets and the managing partner can evaluate that portfolio in financial terms for the first time.
The firms that understand this do not ask whether to use a scoring system. They ask whether they can afford not to.
The Tiered Response Protocol: What to Do With the Score Today
This section is immediately actionable. No CasePort account required. Any PI firm can implement a version of this triage framework with their existing intake team today.
Tier 1 — Respond within 2 minutes. Any case opportunity with a combination of documented injury, clear liable party, and open statute. If operating without SCPS, this is any case where the intake coordinator can confirm all three on a quick initial review of the submission details. These are your highest-expected-value cases. Because first-call energy is finite, Tier 1 cases get it.
Tier 2 — Respond within 5 minutes. Case opportunities where two of three core factors are confirmed and the third is probable. The claimant has a physician visit but not yet a formal report. Liability is likely but unconfirmed. These cases have real expected value and should therefore be treated with urgency — however, not at the cost of displacing Tier 1 cases.
Tier 3 — Respond within 15 minutes, after senior review. Case opportunities where core qualification is unclear. Before the intake coordinator calls, a supervisor reviews the available information. As a result, skilled intake coordinators are not burning their first-call energy on cases that a 30-second review would flag as low-probability.
Tier 4 — Review before calling. Submissions with obvious disqualifying signals — no injury language, wrong case type, statute concern visible in the submission. These should be reviewed and triaged to the appropriate path before any phone capacity is committed.
What this protocol produces: It stops the intake queue from being first-in-first-called and makes it probability-first-priority-called. Because the reallocation of intake energy is systematic rather than ad hoc, the signed-case rate from the same lead volume improves by 20 to 35 percent — without adding a single person to the intake team. Source: CasePort intake optimization framework; Clio Legal Trends Report 2024, intake conversion benchmarks.
The tiered response protocol allocates first-call energy by signed-case probability, not submission time
The first call in any intake sequence is the highest-value call. The claimant is fresh, their urgency is highest, and their receptivity is at its peak. However, a first-in-first-called intake protocol assigns this highest-value call randomly — to whoever submitted first, regardless of case quality or signed-case probability.
Over a year of intake calls, this random assignment produces a significant drag on signed-case output. SCPS-informed triage assigns the highest-value call to the highest-probability case. That realignment — first-call energy to highest-SCPS opportunity is the primary financial benefit of probability-driven intake.
Source: CasePort intake triage research; legal intake call quality benchmarks.
The Feedback Loop That Makes the SCPS Smarter Over Time
Here is the characteristic that separates the signed-case probability score from every other rating system in personal injury case acquisition.
It learns.
Every case opportunity delivered to an approved CasePort firm produces an outcome: signed, declined, or passed. In each case, the SCPS prediction can be compared to the actual result. Over time, that comparison produces calibration data — which factors predicted signing accurately and which did not, for this specific firm, in this specific market, for this specific case type.
At launch, the signed-case probability score reflects CasePort's market-level training data. It is accurate in a general sense — it identifies high-probability cases better than random selection — however, it is not yet calibrated to what your firm specifically signs.
After six months of outcome data from your firm, the SCPS accuracy improves materially. Because the model has seen enough signed and declined cases from your firm, it begins weighting the five factors in a way that matches your firm's actual signing behavior, not the market average.
After twelve months, the signed-case probability score is effectively customized to your firm. It knows that your firm signs rear-end auto cases with posterior disc herniation at a higher rate than the market average because your trial team has specific expertise there. As a result, it routes and scores those opportunities differently for your firm than it would for another firm in the same market.
The signed-case feedback loop does something no lead generation company has ever done: it makes the acquisition system more valuable to you specifically the longer you remain in it. After a year of outcome data, leaving the CasePort network does not just mean finding a new lead source. It means giving up a signed-case probability score calibrated to your firm's specific signing profile and starting from zero with an uncalibrated scoring system anywhere else.
The signed-case probability score is the only acquisition metric in personal injury that improves the longer you use it
Every other metric in personal injury acquisition — cost per lead, conversion rate, cost per signed case reflects what happened. The signed-case probability score predicts what will happen, and it does so with increasing accuracy as outcome data accumulates.
After twelve months, the SCPS reflects the firm's actual signing patterns:case type preferences, injury severity thresholds, liability standards, and response time realities specific to that firm and market.
No other scoring model in legal lead generation has this property. Because more outcome data means more calibration, the SCPS looks less like a market prediction the longer it runs and more like institutional knowledge about your firm.
Source: CasePort signed-case feedback loop methodology; caseport.io/data-standards.
What Changes When SCPS Is Running Inside Your Intake Operation
Picture Monday morning.
The intake coordinator opens her dashboard. Three new case opportunities arrived over the weekend. The signed-case probability score reads: 81%, 47%, and 19%.
She calls the 81% case first. Rear-end auto. Herniated disc, confirmed by ER imaging. Liability clear from the police report. Statute open for 22 months. Her firm's historical conversion rate on this profile: 73%. The expected case value: $7,417.
She reaches the claimant in 4 minutes. Because the case is already worked up and the HIPAA authorization is pre-signed in the firm's name, she moves directly to helping rather than explaining. The retainer is signed before noon.
She then calls the 47% case. Slip-and-fall. Injury documented but liability is disputed. Her supervisor reviews the submission before she calls. The call is handled as a consultation, not a close. The case may develop.
The 19% case — wrong case type, no injury documentation goes to a review queue. A specialist determines within 10 minutes that the claimant does not have a viable case for this firm. No intake coordinator time is committed.
Three cases. One signed before noon. One appropriately handled. One correctly triaged without burning a skilled coordinator on a dead end. This is what probability-driven intake looks like from the inside.
Without a signed-case probability score, all three cases enter the same queue in arrival order. The 19% case might get called first. The 81% case might wait 40 minutes. As a result of that wait, the most valuable opportunity in the queue might sign with a competitor before the coordinator reaches it not because the firm was slow, but because the firm was slow on the wrong case.
Is the Signed-Case Probability Score the Right Tool for Your Firm?
One question determines the answer.
Does your current intake process know the difference between a $7,417 expected-value case and a $0 expected-value case before the first call is made?
If the honest answer is no, if your intake team calls in the order things arrive, without a scoring mechanism, without a triage framework, without a system for identifying which cases deserve priority response then the signed-case probability score is not a luxury. It is the missing structural layer between your acquisition budget and your signed-case output.
The firms with the highest signed-case rates in their markets are not the firms with the largest marketing budgets. They are the firms that allocate their intake capacity to their highest-probability cases first. The SCPS is the tool that makes that allocation systematic rather than accidental — and because it improves with every outcome the system learns from, it is also the tool that compounds in your favor the longer you use it.
Your intake team is ready. The question is what it receives.
Approved firms in the CasePort network see the signed-case probability score on every delivered case opportunity. One number. Five factors. No gut feel required. The score arrives with the dossier before the first call, so the intake coordinator knows exactly which case deserves the fastest, most attentive response.
One firm per protected market. Application required. When a market is assigned, it closes.
CasePort is not a law firm and does not provide legal services or legal advice. The Signed-Case Probability Score is a firm-facing triage tool only. It is not displayed to or described to claimants. All case opportunity routing is compliant with ABA Model Rules 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 5.4. CasePort does not guarantee case outcomes or settlement values. See caseport.io/data-standards for all benchmark figures and methodology.
